A Dosimetric Comparison of Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy (VMAT) with Unflattened Beams to VMAT with Flattened Beams and Tomotherapy for Head and Neck Cancer

T. Ogata, H. Nishimura, H. Mayahara, A. Harada, Yoshiro Matsuo, M. Nakayama, K. Uehara, S. Tsudou, Y. Ejima, R. Sasaki, T. Okayama
{"title":"A Dosimetric Comparison of Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy (VMAT) with Unflattened Beams to VMAT with Flattened Beams and Tomotherapy for Head and Neck Cancer","authors":"T. Ogata, H. Nishimura, H. Mayahara, A. Harada, Yoshiro Matsuo, M. Nakayama, K. Uehara, S. Tsudou, Y. Ejima, R. Sasaki, T. Okayama","doi":"10.4172/2155-9619.1000274","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: The purpose of this study was to compare the dose distributions and treatment delivery efficiency of volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) with flattening filter free (FFF) beams (FFF-VMAT) against VMAT with flattening filter (FF) beams (FF-VMAT) and Helical TomoTherapy (HT) for head and neck cancer. \nMethods: Ten patients with nasopharyngeal and oropharyngeal cancer were chosen for this planning comparison study. Three treatment plans (dual arc FFF-VMAT, dual arc FF-VMAT, and HT) were created for each patient. The three prescription dose levels of the planning target volumes were 69.96, 60, and 54 Gy in 33 fractions, using the simultaneous integrated boost technique. Comparisons of the plan quality were performed by analyzing the homogeneity, conformity, dose to the organs at risk (OARs), the number of monitor units (MUs), and beam-on time (BOT) necessary for delivering the plans. \nResults: The target coverage and sparing of the OARs for FFF-VMAT were almost equivalent to those for FFVMAT and HT. Compared to FF-VMAT, FFF-VMAT and HT significantly increased the number of MUs. The BOTs were the same for FFF-VMAT and FF-VMAT but significantly increased for HT. \nConclusion: We here present the first report of FFF-VMAT achieving a comparable plan quality with less delivery time to that of FF-VMAT and HT in head and neck cancer. FFF-VMAT is a highly efficient and feasible option for the treatment of head and neck cancer in clinical practice.","PeriodicalId":302578,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Radiation Therapy","volume":"9 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-01-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Radiation Therapy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4172/2155-9619.1000274","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Background: The purpose of this study was to compare the dose distributions and treatment delivery efficiency of volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) with flattening filter free (FFF) beams (FFF-VMAT) against VMAT with flattening filter (FF) beams (FF-VMAT) and Helical TomoTherapy (HT) for head and neck cancer. Methods: Ten patients with nasopharyngeal and oropharyngeal cancer were chosen for this planning comparison study. Three treatment plans (dual arc FFF-VMAT, dual arc FF-VMAT, and HT) were created for each patient. The three prescription dose levels of the planning target volumes were 69.96, 60, and 54 Gy in 33 fractions, using the simultaneous integrated boost technique. Comparisons of the plan quality were performed by analyzing the homogeneity, conformity, dose to the organs at risk (OARs), the number of monitor units (MUs), and beam-on time (BOT) necessary for delivering the plans. Results: The target coverage and sparing of the OARs for FFF-VMAT were almost equivalent to those for FFVMAT and HT. Compared to FF-VMAT, FFF-VMAT and HT significantly increased the number of MUs. The BOTs were the same for FFF-VMAT and FF-VMAT but significantly increased for HT. Conclusion: We here present the first report of FFF-VMAT achieving a comparable plan quality with less delivery time to that of FF-VMAT and HT in head and neck cancer. FFF-VMAT is a highly efficient and feasible option for the treatment of head and neck cancer in clinical practice.
头颈癌体积调制弧线治疗(VMAT)与体积调制弧线治疗(VMAT)的剂量学比较
背景:本研究的目的是比较无压扁滤波器(FFF)光束的体积调制电弧治疗(FFF-VMAT)与有压扁滤波器(FF)光束的体积调制电弧治疗(FF-VMAT)和螺旋TomoTherapy (HT)治疗头颈癌的剂量分布和治疗效率。方法:选择10例鼻咽癌和口咽癌患者进行计划比较研究。为每位患者制定了三种治疗方案(双弧FFF-VMAT、双弧FF-VMAT和HT)。采用同步集成增压技术,在33个馏分中获得了69.96、60和54 Gy的计划靶体积处方剂量水平。通过分析计划的均匀性、一致性、危险器官的剂量(OARs)、监测单元(MUs)的数量和交付计划所需的束流时间(BOT)来进行计划质量的比较。结果:FFF-VMAT与FFVMAT和HT的靶部覆盖范围和余量基本相当。与FF-VMAT相比,FF-VMAT和HT均显著增加了小鼠的数量。FFF-VMAT和FF-VMAT的bot相同,但HT的bot显著增加。结论:我们在此首次报道FFF-VMAT在头颈癌中实现了与FF-VMAT和HT相当的计划质量,且交付时间更短。FFF-VMAT是临床上治疗头颈癌的一种高效可行的选择。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信